Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
net/publication/228680968
CITATIONS READS
15 2,135
2 authors, including:
Praveen K. Malhotra
StrongMotions Inc.
66 PUBLICATIONS 1,198 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
All content following this page was uploaded by Praveen K. Malhotra on 30 July 2015.
INTRODUCTION
Seismic response of cylindrical liquid-storage tanks is reasonably well understood
共e.g., Jacobsen 1949; Housner 1963, 1982; Haroun and Housner 1981; Veletsos et al.
1974, 1977, 1984, 1997; Malhotra 2000; Malhotra et al. 2000兲. The liquid mass is as-
sumed divided into two parts: 共1兲 the impulsive mass near the base of the tank moves
with the tank wall, and 共2兲 the convective mass near the top experiences free-surface
sloshing motion. The natural period of vibration of the impulsive mass ranges from
0.1 s to 0.3 s and that of the convective mass ranges from 2 s to 6 s. The response of
the impulsive mass controls the base shear and overturning moment in the tank, whereas
the response of the convective mass controls the height of sloshing wave.
It is desirable to provide sufficient clearance 共freeboard兲 between the liquid surface
and the tank roof to prevent sloshing waves from impacting the roof during earthquakes.
However, it is not always practical to do so. For large diameter tanks, the required free-
board can be quite high. If provided, it results in unused storage capacity, which can be
quite expensive. For tanks located on deep soils or those subjected to near-field motions
共e.g., Somerville 1993, Malhotra 1999兲, the abundance of low frequencies in the ground
motion can result in very large freeboard requirement. Also, for tanks located on the
roofs of buildings, the freeboard requirement can be quite high. In such cases, it is com-
mon to compromise on the freeboard requirement.
Insufficient freeboard causes 共1兲 upward load on the roof due to impacts from the
sloshing wave, and 共2兲 increased impulsive mass due to constraining action of the roof.
The upward force could break the connection between the roof and shell and tear the
a兲
FM Global, 1151 Boston-Providence Turnpike, P.O. Box 9102, Norwood, MA 02062-9102; E-mail:
Praveen.Malhotra@FMGlobal.com
1185
Earthquake Spectra, Volume 21, No. 4, pages 1185–1192, November 2005; © 2005, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute
1186 P. K. MALHOTRA
shell if not considered in the design of the tank. Also, the tank shell could buckle or tear
at the base if not designed for the loads resulting from additional impulsive mass.
The objective of this paper is to estimate the roof, shell, and foundation loads arising
from insufficient freeboard. An exact solution of nonlinear sloshing response from fluid
dynamics is quite complex. Instead, an approximate solution with engineering accuracy
is presented.
Table 1. Recommended design values for the impulsive and convective modes of vibration as a func-
tion of the tank height to radius ratio H / R 共Malhotra et al. 2000兲
where teq = equivalent uniform thickness of the tank wall, = mass density of liquid, and
E = modulus of elasticity of tank material. The coefficients Ci and Cc are presented in
columns 2 and 3 of Table 1. The coefficient Ci is dimensionless, whereas Cc is expressed
in s / m1/2; therefore, substituting R in meters in Equation 2 yields the correct value of
the convective period in seconds. For tanks with non-uniform wall thickness, teq may be
computed by taking a weighted average over the wetted height of the tank wall, assign-
ing highest weight to the thickness near the base of the tank where the strain is maxi-
mum.
BASE SHEAR
The impulsive and convective base shears are
Qc = mc ⫻ SA共Tcon兲 共4兲
where mw = the mass of tank wall, mr = the mass of tank roof; mb = the mass of tank base;
SA共Timp兲 = the impulsive spectral acceleration, obtained from a 2 percent damping elastic
response spectrum for steel and pre-stressed concrete tanks, and a 5 percent damping
elastic response spectrum for concrete tanks; and SA共Tcon兲 = the convective spectral ac-
celeration, obtained from a 0.5 percent damping elastic response spectrum.
1188 P. K. MALHOTRA
Mc = mc ⫻ hc ⫻ SA共Tcon兲 共6兲
where hi and hc are the heights of the centroid of the impulsive and convective hydro-
dynamic wall pressures; they are provided in columns 6 and 7 of Table 1 as fractions of
liquid height H; hw and hr are the heights of the centers of gravity of the tank wall and
roof, respectively.
SA共Tcon兲
d=R⫻ 共9兲
g
where g = acceleration due to gravity. A simple way to understand Equation 9 is to imag-
ine that the liquid-filled tank moves horizontally with an acceleration SA共Tcon兲, as shown
in Figure 2a. Under equilibrium, the free-surface would be at an angle with respect to
the horizontal, where
= tan−1 冉 SA共Tcon兲
g
冊 共10兲
This gives the height of the sloshing wave as d = R · tan = R · SA共Tcon兲 / g, thus, the proof
of Equation 9.
TECHNICAL NOTE: SLOSHING LOADS IN LIQUID-STORAGE TANKS WITH INSUFFICIENT FREEBOARD 1189
Figure 2. Liquid-filled tank translating with an acceleration SA共Tcon兲: 共a兲 sufficient freeboard,
and 共b兲 insufficient freeboard.
ROOF LOAD
Next, consider the case of insufficient freeboard, i.e., actual freeboard df is less than
the required freeboard d obtained from Equation 9. For a horizontal acceleration of
SA共Tcon兲, the free-surface of the liquid is still at an angle from the horizontal. How-
ever, a portion of the tank roof is wetted, as seen in Figure 2b. We assume that the tank
roof is flat. This provides a conservative estimate of the effect of sloshing wave, because
a non-flat roof provides extra room to accommodate the sloshing wave. From SA共Tcon兲 / g
we know 共Equation 10兲. We can then determine the wetted width xf of the tank roof by
equating the volume of the empty space in the tank to R2df. This gives the following
relationship between xf and df:
df 1
=
d
1−
R
冉 冊冉
xf
· 0 −
sin 20
2
+
2
3
冊
sin3 0 共11兲
pared to the expected natural period of vibration of the tank roof. Typically, the period of
the sloshing wave is longer than 3 s and because it is applied near the circumference of
the roof, it excites higher modes of vibration of the roof, which are generally of much
shorter period 共stiff兲.
1 1
Fmax ⬇ Pmax · xf = · g · x2f · tan 共13兲
2 2
Substituting, tan = SA共Tcon兲 / g 共Equation 10兲 gives
1
Fmax ⬇ · x2f · SA共Tcon兲 共14兲
2
Equation 14 assumes that the upward force is resisted by the wet side of the tank shell
only. This is not a good assumption when xf / R is greater than, say, 0.5. Fmax should then
be estimated from more accurate static force-equilibrium analysis of the tank roof.
TECHNICAL NOTE: SLOSHING LOADS IN LIQUID-STORAGE TANKS WITH INSUFFICIENT FREEBOARD 1191
The constraint on the sloshing motion increases the mass participation in the impul-
sive mode. In the limiting case, if the freeboard is reduced to zero, the entire liquid in
the tank becomes impulsive. Therefore, the smaller the actual/required freeboard df / d,
the smaller the convective mass and the larger the impulsive mass. Assuming that the
convective mass reduces linearly from mc to 0 as df / d reduces from 1 to 0, the adjusted
values of the impulsive and convective masses are
冉 冊
冦 冧
df
mi + mc ⫻ 1 − for df ⬍ d
mi = d 共15兲
mi for df 艌 d
冦 冧
df
mc ⫻ for df ⬍ d
mc = d 共16兲
mc for df 艌 d
For tanks with insufficient freeboard, masses mi and mc should be used instead of mi and
mc to compute the base shears and moments 共Equations 3–8兲. We assume that the effect
of insufficient freeboard on impulsive and convective periods, hence SA共Timp兲 and
SA共Tcon兲 can be ignored.
CONCLUSION
A simple method has been presented to estimate additional loads on a tank’s roof,
wall, and foundation due to impacts from sloshing waves. In many cases, it may be eco-
nomical to design a tank for these additional loads than to build a taller tank with suf-
ficient freeboard.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Two anonymous reviewers provided several helpful comments. Martin Koller cor-
rected a mistake in Equations 12 and 13.
1192 P. K. MALHOTRA
REFERENCES
Haroun, M. A., and Housner, G. W., 1981. Seismic design of liquid-storage tanks, J. Technical
Councils, ASCE, 107 共1兲, 191–207.
Housner, G. W., 1963. The dynamic behavior of water tanks, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 53 共2兲,
381–387.
Housner, G. W., 1982. Dynamic analysis of fluids in containers subject to acceleration, ASCE
Technical Seminar, Los Angeles, Calif.
Jacobsen, L. S., 1949. Impulsive hydrodynamics of fluid inside a cylindrical tank and of fluid
surrounding a cylindrical pier, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 39 共3兲, 189–203.
Malhotra, P. K., 1999. Response of buildings to near-field pulse-like ground motions, Earth-
quake Eng. Struct. Dyn. 28 共11兲, 1309–1326.
Malhotra, P. K., 2000. Practical nonlinear seismic analysis of tanks, Earthquake Spectra 16 共2兲
473–492.
Malhotra, P., Wenk, T., and Wieland, M., 2000. Simple procedure for seismic analysis of liquid-
storage tanks, Struct. Eng. Int. 共IABSE, Zurich, Switzerland兲 10 共3兲, 197–201, International
Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering.
Somerville, P., and Graves, R., 1993. Conditions that give rise to unusually large long period
ground motions, Struct. Des. Tall Build. 2, 211–232.
Veletsos, A. S., 1974. Seismic effects in flexible liquid-storage tanks, Proceedings, 5th World
Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Rome, Italy, pp. 630–639.
Veletsos, A. S., 1984. Seismic response and design of liquid storage tanks, in Guidelines for the
Seismic Design of Oil and Gas Pipeline Systems, edited by Douglas Nyman, Technical
Council on Lifeline Earthquake Engineering., ASCE, New York, NY, pp. 255–370.
Veletsos, A. S., and Shivakumar, P., 1997. Tanks containing liquids or solids, Chapter 15 in
Computer Analysis and Design of Earthquake Resistant Structures, A Handbook, edited by
D. E. Beskos and S. A. Anagnostopoulos, Computational Mechanics Publications,
Southampton, U. K. or Boston, pp. 725–774.
Veletsos, A. S., and Yang, J. Y., 1977. Earthquake response of liquid storage tanks: Advances in
civil engineering through mechanics, Proceedings, 2nd Engineering Mechanics Specialty
Conference, Raleigh, N.C., ASCE, pp. 1–24.
共Received 11 September 2003; accepted 20 January 2005兲